Within his posting on "Should the AME Church take a Pro-Choice Stand?" Harold Gibson raises another issue of theological significance for the Church. He underlines the urgency of taking resolving on these issues because "folks in our pews are anxiously awating our response." I thought we also need some discussion on this matter.

Perhaps, more than the folks on the pews, most of the clergy need to be helped on this matter relating same sex marriage.

Bishop Richardson, in his acceptance speech of the Presidency of the Council of Bishops, lift this issue of homosexuality and its challenges (cf. www.ame-church.com)

In South Africa, key among the achievements made, was the acceptance of a constitution drafted following democratic process and confirmed by the Constitutional Court. This constitution enshrines also, among other fundamental human rights, the right to sexual orientation. It is not just policy matter or decision by some court of law but a constitutional issue. This is a constitution that we heard it be applauded as progressive globally.

How does one minister in this context? If and when the courts made a determination that people of same sex can be joined together, considering that decisions have been taken in a variety of areas, what do I do (deny them the right to that privilege/benefit)?

Does the Church allow gay and lesbians to its ministry? Can a clergy be a Bishop in the church?

-- Anonymous, June 30, 2003

Answers

To answer your questions:

Yes.

-- Anonymous, June 30, 2003

Rev. John I think your answer is accurate but incomplete. I do not believe that we ordain "open" homosexuals into ministry. The AME church and many other black denominations have an active "don't ask - don't tell" network and as a result we have ambiguity. Is it wrong? I don't know. Should we be open and affirming? Theologically perhaps, Practically, are you kidding?

-- Anonymous, June 30, 2003

That is a really tough issue. It would be contradictory of a church that claims that God loves all and welcomes all to discriminate against people. On the other hand, homosexuality is an understood moral 'no-no', and has been for ages, so a church actively embracing homosexuality might alienate certain segments of congregations, in turn changing the demographics of congregations. I have never really understood why sexuality is for some people the core of their identity; this goes for both straight and gay people. To me, that just indicates there are other issues that person needs to deal with before taking the responsibility of a spiritual leader, or for lay people, indicates they do not realize that though sex is an important part of life, having a balanced, healthy outlook about sex is critical to be spiritually healthy as well. For that reason, I think that when it comes to clergy members, when something like sexuality is a part of their core identity it can detract from their clerical purpose, and distract their mind from promoting God instead of themselves, promoting personal agendas rather than the principle agenda of the church. A person that has dedicated their life to ministry has in theory dedicated themselves to teaching the doctrine of their particular faith, most Christian doctrines utilize the union of man and woman to illustrate a number of Biblical principles, therefore it may complicate peoples understanding and maybe even inhibit some peoples understanding if any other illustration of union with God other than the union between man and woman is utilized. If it were my church, I'd say that God welcomes all period, God is a god of balance, and that when sexual preference is your identity, then something is out of balance. As far as clergy members, if it were my church, I would not want openly homosexual people (i.e., people that identify themselves through their sexual preference) to serve under me, beside me, etc. because I feel that it would be distracting. I would not want people thinking of that gay minister while they should be focusing on what that particular minister is saying about God.

-- Anonymous, June 30, 2003

There are several prominent American theologians who have done considerable research establishing a "gay" presence in Scripture and Theology. The former American Anglican Bishop and iconoclastic thinker John Spong and the Dean of the Harvard Chapel Peter Gomes are two of the more prominent thinkers on this topic. When I lived in Wash DC a black male tenured professor at the Howard Divinity School (name escapes me right now) was one of the leading authorities in a black gay motiff in Scripture. Any anti-homosexual thesis must show why Spong's "12 theses" or Gomes "Gay Paradigm" are theologically specious arguments. References to the Genesis story about the destruction of Sodom or St. Paul's usage of "effiminate lusts" are helpful starts but the critique must go beyond these two common rhetorical points.

Bro. Harold is essentially correct, the black church utilizes a form of "don't ask, don't tell". However, I would modify his conclsuion by adding that black denominations which are less dependent on seminary trained clergy (COGIC, MT. Calvary Holiness, Primitive Baptist, etc.)tend to be less tolerant on alternative sexual orientation topics. Recent accomodations to the gay paradigm in the black church is only a reflection of a shifting power structure. Let's be brutally honest. Many of our music ministries have us in a stranglehold since key personnel are either openly or covertly gay. If they stage a mass walk-out due to dissatisfaction with anti-gay remarks from the pulpit, who will provide the music? Can the AMEC survive such a boycott? Are we willing to take a prinicipled stand against gays in the ministry or gay marriage knowing the repercussions? I know of one case where an openly gay minister completed all of the requirements for ordination yet an AME Bishop declined to confer ordination status because he was gay. This particular Bishop in question was criticized for his last minute decision but a strong case can be made that he acted properly since it is an unwritten rule that such conduct is not becoming of a shepard who is entrusted with the care of diverse members in his/her charge.

Intersting how the AME Social Action Committee failed to provide commentary about this topic or the recent Supreme Court case overturning anti-sodomy laws. Yet, the same committee couldn't contain their enthusiams in discussing at length the High Court's rulings on affirmative action. This is a clear indication to me that our church remains uncomfortable talking about sex. And to think, we wonder why our children wind up in certain situations. QED

-- Anonymous, June 30, 2003

First of all there shouldn't be any anti-gay remarks made from the pulpit. I'm sure that would help to alleviate some tension over the issue. Should 'sex education' be a part of Sunday service, no I don't think so. But, I do think there is some legitimate place for the issue, especially for young people, somewhere in the churches programming.

-- Anonymous, June 30, 2003

Those who have been A.M.E. for their entire lives are probably aware that the church periodically issues what is know as "Position Papers." These are written by both clergy and lay who have some expertise in the area addressed. They are chaired by a Bishop and usually published and presented to the delegates of the General Conference so that the information may be disseminated when they get back to their respective churches and the communities in which they live. Although they are somewhat general in scope, they are tantamount to the church's official stance. They are also sanction and adopted by the General Conference Delegates.

The last such volume I have was chaired and edited by Bishop Frederick Hilborn Talbot and was presented at the 45th Quadrennial Session of the General Conference in Louisville, KY, June 26 - July 3, 1996. (I was not a delegate in 2000.)

Included in this volume is Position Paper IX, written and presented by Cornelia R. Graves, M.D. It is entitled, "Human Spirituality and Sexuality - A Perspective for the Black Church". Below I will attempt to summarize what it says.

To Bill and my and other collegiate friends, it has been a number of years since I have actually written a "Review of Research." So you will have to forgive the obvious errors I have made.

To begin with Dr. Graves discusses what the positions of the Black Church have generally been and how these positions tend to encourage confusion about human sexuality. She states the church has also tended to adopt positions, which make the relationship between spirituality and human sexuality vague and unclear. The result then often leads to promiscuity, adultery, homosexuality and misguided notions about sex.

According to Dr. Graves the Black Church position tends to fall in three basic categories:

# 1 - Hear No Evil, See No Evil

This position basically is to ignore any conflict which exists between what the church believes and teaches and what its members thik, say and do.

#2 - Just Say No

With this position the church simply says don't do this because God says so but no supportive reasoning is given or Biblical context is supplied.

#3 - Tread Lightly

Here the church skirts the issues entirely and tends not to address any issues, which might offend. Thus, adultery, homosexuality and promiscuity are neither mentioned nor discussed.

The thesis goes on to point of the fallacy of each of these positions and where they lead, as well as why the church simply is required to take a stand.

That being said we come to the proposed and adopted position of the A.M.E. Church on the issues we face. It is further suggested that these should be used to formulate a program that teaches a positive approach- God's approach- to the relationship of sexuality and spirituality of the member of our church.

 Sexuality is given by God and therefore is not intended to be vile, vulgar or without meaning.

 God's purpose for our life is good, it is not meant to restrict or inhibit our lives but to allow us to live our lives to the fullest.

 Premarital sex does not allow one to develop self-worth or personal wholeness with God.

 Adultery severs the intimacy of not one but two relationships.

 Homosexual practices violate both biological design and God's intent.

 Homosexuality does not challenge one to develop understanding or intimacy with a person of a totally different perspective or outlook on life.

 Sexual promiscuity results not only in decreased self-worth, but it increased anxiety.

 Promiscuity does not allow one to develop the intense relationship that God intended.

 While God does not punish us for our behavior, AIDS, sexually transmitted diseases, unwanted pregnancy are other situations are a direct result of our disobedience.

 God created both men and women in His image. He intended for His position to be respected. Viewing any person as strictly and object of sexual desire violates this respect.

 As our bodies are God's temple and the Spirit of God dwells within, the fruit of God's spirit should be evident.

 We can only find true intimacy with another person when we enjoy intimacy with God.

-- Anonymous, June 30, 2003

This topic is so difficult and I really appreciate that the responders are grappling with the fact that it is difficult to point out one form of perceived sexual "sin" without at least acknowledging other forms. Many preachers and lay persons find it hard to speak about sexual sins because they are guilty of many of the sins they denounce. For example, my son once asked me in a direct manner had I engaged in sexual activity before I was married. He is 16 years old and many of his friends have had several encounters with several partners. I decided to be forthright with him and tell him that while I did go through the teens without being sexually active, once out of college I decided to do "adult" things. He joked that he always knew I was "slow" and then he remarked that he always felt adults were very uncomfortable when the topic of abstinence comes up because few of them abstained from sex before marriage.

Many of our ministers and church leaders are uncomfortable because they know that they themselves or many of their ministerial partners have engaged or do engage in homosexual activity. Theologically they claim silence citing, Jesus' response to the woman caught in the act of adultery "Let he without sin cast the first stone." Yet if you use this theological response how can you get around his statement to the woman "Go and sin no more."

-- Anonymous, July 01, 2003

IT IS MY BELIEF THAT GOD CREATED MALE AND FEMALE. I TAKE THE APPROACH TO THESE QUESTIONS BY CONSIDERING CHRIST JESUS WHO DIED FOR ALL MANNER OF SICKNESSES AND DISEASES, THUS MAKING HIM A "WOUNDED HEALER!" THOSE OF US WHOM HAVE BEEN CHOSEN TO POINT OTHERS TO CHRIST, THE ONLY TRUE SAVIOR, SHOULD NOT CONDEMN OR CRITICALLY JUDGE THOSE WHO ARE ACTUALLY ACTING OUT OF DIS-EASED WOUNDS THAT HAVE GONE UNNOTICED AS NEEDING SERIOUS HEALING! INSTEAD, WE SHOULD DO LIKE CHRIST DID IN HIS APPROACH TO THE WOMAN CAUGHT IN THE VERY ACT OF ADULTERY,I.E. SHOW THEM A MORE EXCELLENT WAY TO LIVING BY EMITTING LOVE TOWARDS THEM WHICH WILL OPEN UP AN AVENUE FOR US TO MINISTER TRUTH UNTO THEM AS CHRIST DID BY TELLING HER IN A COMPASSIONATE AND LOVING MANNER, "GO AND SIN NO MORE!" WHAT IMPRESSED HER WHAT HIS APPROACH TOWARDS HER THAT WAS TOTALLY DIFFERENT FROM HER ACCUSERS' APPROACH WHICH WAS SELF- RIGHTEOUS AND SMUG-LIKE! PEOPLE RESPOND BETTER TO LOVINGKINDNESS THAN THEY DO TO HARSH TONES! LOVE MAKES THE DIFFERENCE! MOST PEOPLE IN THESE ABNORMAL CATEGORIES ALREADY KNOW THAT WHAT THEY ARE PRACTICING IS WRONG! GOD NEVER INTENDED FOR SAME SEXNESS TO PREVAIL OVER WHAT HE DESIGNED TO MULTIPLY AND BE FRUITFUL, THEREFORE, WE AS HIS CHOSEN SERVANTS, MUST FOLLOW HIS EXAMPLE IN PRECIPITATING A CHANGE IN THE WEAK AND DIFFERENT FROM THE NORM!

-- Anonymous, July 10, 2003

Rev. Baker Bradford, your shouting hurts my ears.

Be Blessed

-- Anonymous, July 10, 2003

Correct me if I am wrong, but the AME Church, as a denomination, has not taken a position on homosexuality. Other denominations such as the United Church of Christ,has struggled with the issue, pro and con, on the issue of human sexuality, with homosexuality being a part of human sexuality. However, the UCC church has adopted an "open and affirming" position on homosexuality, even though some individual churches do not adopt this "open and affirming" position. I do not recall any open forums leading toward AME position papers on the subject of homosexuality. There should be an open, non-punitive dialog about human sexuality and spirituality in relation to worship and service. Whether we want to accept it or not, there are gay and lesbian persons who are active, vital members of the clergy and laity of this zion. So, as of right now, the AME church adopts a "don't ask, don't tell" position on the issue of homosexuality.

-- Anonymous, July 13, 2003

If there are ministries out there that are addressing this issue, please share with the rest of us. We know the problem exists but what type of support is available for AME's or the community at large from a Christian perspective. What type of ministries have been developed to address many of the other issues (adultry, molestation, various addictions) that exists in our congregations. These are some of the issues that need to be addressed by making treatment/assistance available to individuals without threatening them or breaking confidentiality. They maybe wanting help but don't know where to go to get the help they need. If there are no ministries currently available well there is work to do. None of us might need these services today but tomorrow, it might help a son, daughter, friend, spouse, parent. So by putting something in place to day we may be helping ourselves later.

So if there are congregations who are already addressing these issues please share. Then others can follow your blueprint and modify it where necessary.

-- Anonymous, July 14, 2003

The 11th Episcopal District will be convening its Christian Education COngress next week. One of the sessions will be devoted to "What AMEs believe about topics like abortion, pre-marital sex and homosexuality. The development of a "white paper" on a topic is not the same as the topic being formally integrated within the governing sturcture of the church. You will not find any reference to 'gay', 'homosexual' or 'sexual orientation' in the Discipline. It is not included in the Index of terms nor is it included in the 25 Articles of Religion. Until the General Conference formally addresses the matter the AME position on homosexuality and gay marriage is precisely as Brother Harold and AJ state, 'Dont't Ask, Don't Tell'. Our reluctant public response to this issue reflects the continuing difficulty and lack of maturity we have about this subject. QED

-- Anonymous, July 14, 2003

Why do ya'll think every Min of Music is Gay...get over it or do ya'll have some issues with your own preference..ordain as well as lay...Grow up in Christ...I know we are in for a big surprise when stand before God when we have to give account of what we did this side of Jordan...Do sweat the small stuff..

-- Anonymous, March 29, 2004